STRUCTURAL STEEL EDUCATIONAL COUNCIL

TECHNICAL INFORMATION & PRODUCTSERVICE

December 1993

Common Steel Erection

Problems
and Suggested Solutions

by

James J. Putkey
 Acknowledgements
The author wishes to thank the following persons for their input, review,
and comments on the content of this Steel TIPS publication:

· Members of the Structural Steel Educational Council

· Dave McEuen, California Erectors, Bay Area, Inc.
· William C. Honeck, Structural Engineer with Forell/Elsesser Engineers, Inc.

The information presented in this publication has been prepared in accordance with recognized
engineering principles and construction practices and is for general information only. While it is
believed to be accurate, this information should not be used or relied upon for any specific
application without competent professional examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability,
and applicability by a licensed professional engineer or architect. The publication of the material
contained herein is not intended as a representation or warranty on the part of the Structural Steel
Educational Council, or of any other person named herein, that this information is suitable for any
general or particular use or of freedom infringement of any patent or patents. Anyone making use
of this information assumes all liability arising from such use.
 COMMON STEEL ERECTION PROBLEMS AND
SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS
List of Problems

No
. • P
a_
=e
N o
.

Anchor Bolts
1. Low Anchor Bolts 5
2. Misplaced Anchor Bolts 7
3. Rotated Anchor Bolt Pattern 9
4. Inadequate Anchor Bolts for Column Erection 10

Erection
5. One-Bolt Connections 11
6. Columns or Bents Tied Together With Non-Bolted Steel Joists 15
7. Steel Joists Without Bolted Bridging 16
8. Columns or Bents Tied in With Timber 17
9. Steel Columns or Partial Bents Not Tied In 18
10. Non-Self-Supporting Steel Frames 19
11. Column Splices Too Low or Too High Above Floor 20
12. Columns Interrupted by Beams 21
13. Columns Offset From Beam Framing 22
14. Revisions and Alternates Not Flagged on Drawings 23
15. D o u b l e - F r a m e dBeam Connections to Girder 24
16. D o u b l e - F r a m e dBeam Connections to Column Web 25

Bolting
17. Mixed Bolts 27
18. Mixed Bolt Diameters 28
19. Reuse of High-Strength Bolts 28

Welding
20. Prequalified and Non-Prequalified Weld Joints 29
21. Extending Continuity Plate for Back-up Bar 30
22. Welded Connections to Inside of Column 31
23. Restrained Welded Joints 33
24. F i e l d - W e l d e dCurb Angles 35

Decking
25. Steel Floor Deck Spanning Uneven Surfaces 36

Ge
ner
al
26. Project Specifications 37
 COMMONSTEEL ERECTION PROBLEMSAND
SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS
Introduction
Preface
About two years ago a structural engineer asked me
the following question, "Why don't you write a book-
let on steel erection? We keep seeing the same
erection problems occur over and over again, and it
would be nice to have a reference for erectors,
fabricators, and structural designers to either avoid
a problem or to present a solution to a problem."
The question was posed to two steel erectors, and
they both thought such a publication would be an
excellent idea. The end result is this Steel TIPS.
Many publications exist that inform the structural
designer on how to select types of steel, design
economically, reduce fabrication costs, and how to
design various types of structures or portions of
structures. But what source of information is avail-
able to the designer when the steel erector makes
an inquiry regarding the steel design or experiences
problems that require the designer's input? These
inquiries or problems may result from:
· Erection or fabrication errors.
· Erection procedures or sequences.
· Faulty work of other trade contractors.
· Design that can lead to safety problems.
· Erection equipment loads into the structure.
· Changes or alternates requested by the owner.
Now, looking ahead in the construction timetable,
one might logically ask the following questions,
"What source of information is available to the
structural designer to produce a design that can
avoid these erection problems? What are the
details to avoid? What are the desired details? Why
doesn't the steel industry provide structural design-
ers, and others, with solutions to common design-
related problems experienced bythe steel erector"
4
Purpose
The purpose of this Steel TIPS is to provide struc-
tural designers and steel erectors with a basic and
convenient source of solutions to common steel
erection problems that involve the structural de-
signer.
Organization and Content
To provide structural designers with solutions to
common steel erection problems, 26 common prob-
lems with suggested solutions are provided. The
problems are divided into six categories: anchor
bolts, erection, bolting, welding, decking, and gen-
eral. In each category a specific problem is shown
by its title. The problem is then described and the
suggested solution is given.
The content of this Steel TIPS does not address the
various methods of erecting steel. If the designer
needs to design a structure with unusual features,
or with a required erection procedure or sequence,
then a sponsor firm of the Structural Steel Educa-
tional Council might be consulted to make certain
the unusual features can be economically erected.
The erection problems presented are not only "com-
mon'' problems, but may also be considered basic,
reoccurring problems. So the content is chosen to
be especially useful to the new structural designer
(and maybe experienced designers).
Some of the problems or portions of problems
addressed in this Steel TIPS are mentioned or
addressed in previous Steel TIPS, or in the AISC
publications Modern Steel Construction, and Steel
Design Guide Series. These problems and their
solutions are now conveniently gathered into this
publication.
1. Low Anchor Bolts
Problem
Anchor bolts are sometimes set with their tops
lower than the detailed elevation. Two situations
can exist: 1 ) the bolts are placed so Iow that the top
of the bolt is below the top of the base plate and the
anchor bolt nut cannot be engaged, or 2) the bolt
top extends above the base plate, but not high
enough to allow full thread engagement of the nut.
Setting Tolerances. Section 7.5 of the AISC
Code of Standard Practice requires the owner to
set anchor bolts in accordance with approved
anchor bolt plans. [1] The Code provides for a
+1/2-inch tolerance for the elevation of the top of
anchor bolts. The contractor setting the anchor
bolts should be able to meet this tolerance, but
errors can occur. Section 7.5 in the Commentary
on the Code of Standard Practice discusses the
installation of anchor bolts. [2]
Bolt Detailing. Anchor bolt detailing is discussed
in Chapter 7 of AISC Detailing forSteel Construc-
tion. [3] To match the minus 1/2-inch tolerance
noted in Section 7.5 of the Code, the steel detailer
should allow for at least a 1/2-inch projection of the
bolt above the top of the nut. If the anchor bolt is
set 1/2-inch Iow, the nut will still obtain full thread
engagement. However, when the minus 1/2-inch
tolerance is exceeded, the problem of a Iow
anchor bolt exists.
Solution
Extending the Bolts. Anchor bolts that are set
Iow are commonly called "short anchor bolts."
Short bolts need to be corrected by making them
longer. Two methods of making the bolts longer
are threaded couplers and welded extensions.
The "Steel Interchange" feature in Modem Steel
Construction, January 1993, and "Some Practical
Aspects of Column Base Selection," SteelDesign
Guide Series 1: Column Base Plates, discuss
these two methods. [4, 5] For either correction
method, the erector must work with the structural
designer (and general contractor). If the anchor
bolts are designed to resist uplift, in addition to
providing column stability during erection, then the
structural designer may require special proce-
dures. See AISC Manual of Steel Construction,
Specification J10, page 5-172, for loads on an-
chor bolts. [6]
Preventative Solution. A"preventative" solution
that anticipates Iow anchor bolts is to design and
detail anchor bolts with additional bolt projection.
Examples include:
· The structural designer shows a 1-inch bolt pro-
jection above the top of the nut in the base plate
details on the structural drawings. This 1-inch
bolt projection allows bolts to be set an additional
1/2-inch lower than the minus 1/2-inch setting toler-
ance provided by the AISC Code of Standard
Practice, and still obtain full thread engagement.
· The steel fabricator details anchor bolts with the
top of the bolt one bolt diameter above the top of
the nut. So for bolts larger than 1-inch diameter,
even more bolt projection is furnished than the
above example. For example, the detail of a 2-
inch diameter bolt will show the top of the bolt
detailed 2 inches above the top of the nut.
Full Thread Engagement. Short anchor bolts
that prevent full thread engagement can be a
frustrating problem. First, the question arises,
What is full thread engagement?. Section IIl.F in
Chapter 2 of AISC Quality Criteria and Inspection
Standards discusses full thread engagement for
high-strength bolts. [7] Section III.F refers to
Section 2(b) of the "Specification for Structural
Joints Using ASTM A325 or A490 Bolts," on page
5-265 of AISC Manual of Steel Construction. [6]
Section 2(b) states, "The length of bolts shall be
such that the end of the bolt will be flush with or
outside the face of the nut when properly in-
stalled." The same criteria could apply to nuts on
anchor bolts.
Second, what action is necessary if the top of the
bolt is just below the top of the nut? Instead of
lengthening the bolt, the nut might be welded to the
bolt by filling in the space between the top of the
bolt and the top of the nut with weld metal. How-
ever, welding the nut to the bolt is not always
allowed, particularly if high-strength, heat-treated
bolts and nuts are used, and the bolts are subject
to tensile loads. See "Steel Interchange" in the
December 1992, May 1993, and July 1993 issues
of Modern Steel Construction. [8, 9, 10] If the
erector can prove the '"fill-in" weld is adequate, the
structural designer may approve this welding pro-
cedure. But to provide proper column support, the
weld may need to be made before the lifting line is
released from the column.
5
Instead of welding the nut to the bolt, the erector
might consider limited air carbon arc gouging of
the base plate surface under the nut to provide full
thread engagement. This procedure must be
approved by the structural designer.

Practical Procedure. A practical procedure is for

the erector to review the as-built survey of the bolt
elevations before starting erection, determine bolts
that are set Iow, work with the contractor to resolve
how to correct them, decide who is to make the
corrections, and make corrections before erection
crews arrive at the jobsite.
2. Misplaced Anchor Bolts
Problem
The erector discovers anchor bolts are:
· Incorrectly spaced.
· Located off the established column lines.
· Tilted (out of plumb).
· Bent over flat, damaged, or even broken off.
· Installed with the bolt pattern rotated 90 degrees.
See the problem, "Rotated Anchor Bolt Pattern."
· Installed to include anycombination of the above.
Installation Conditions. The installation of an-
chor bolts is not an easy task under the best of
conditions. If the foundation contractor has a firm,
level, dry, and uncongested job site, then the steel
erector will probably find properly installed anchor
bolts. But we all know most foundation sites are
not in the above listed condition. So misplaced
anchor bolts may be expected.
Solution
Survey of Bolts. The first line of defense for the
steel erector against misplaced anchor bolts is to
review the as-built anchor bolt survey before steel
erection starts. Then the steel erector will know if
any corrective work is required, have the correc-
tive work performed before steel erection starts,
and not be faced with the frustration and delay
expense of correcting the bolts while erecting the
columns.
Setting Tolerances. Section 7.5 of the AISC
Code of Standard Practice specifies tolerances for
setting anchor bolts. [1] These tolerances ac-
knowledge that bolts will not be set exactly as
shown on the anchor bolt plan. To allow for
misplaced bolts, holes in the base plates or holes
in the framing angles from the columns to the base
plates are allowed to be made oversized. See
Table 6-1 on page 6-12, ManualofSteelConstruc-
tion, Vol. II, Connections. [11] For example, 23/4 -
inch diameter holes are allowed for 13/4-inch diam-
eter bolts. Thus, the oversized holes will allow the
erector to overcome some misplacement of the
anchor bolts.
If the bolts are misplaced too much for the over-
sized holes to overcome, then corrective work
must be performed. The type of corrective work
depends on the function of the anchor bolts. All
anchor bolts serve to locate the columns and
prevent overturning of the columns during steel
erection. Some anchor bolts tie the column to the
foundation to resist uplift, overturning, and shear
from building design loads. The latter functions
may require more extensive corrective work for
misplaced bolts. In any event, inform the struc-
tural designer of the corrective work.
If bolts are misplaced up to 1/2 inch, the oversized
base plate holes normally allow the base plate and
column to be placed near or on the column line.
For example, the 23/4-inch diameter base plate
hole for a 13/4-inch diameter anchor bolt allows for
a 1/2-inch adjustment of the base plate. If the bolts
are misplaced by more than 1/2 inch, then correc-
tive work is required.
Anchor Bolts Designed to Prevent Overturn-
ing of Column During Steel Erection. For
anchor bolts designed to prevent overturning of
the column during steel erection, corrective work
may include:
· Slotting the base plate or column angle holes.
· Fabricating a base plate to match the misplaced
bolts.
· Fabricating an oversized base plate with stub
bolts welded to the base plate in the correct
location, and then welding the base plate to the
rotated bolts.
· Making an "s" bend in the bolts. (But not too
sharp of a bend.)
· Chipping away the concrete to make a larger "s"
bend.
· Burning off the bolt and placing new expansion
bolts.
· Burning off the bolt and welding a new bolt to the
side of the projecting stub.
An extensive discussion on misplaced anchor
bolts is given in "Some Practical Aspects of Col-
umn Selection," by David T. Ricker. [5] A discus-
sion on the design and use of column bases and
base plates is contained in Chapter 6 of the AISC
Manual of Steel Construction, Volume II, Connec-
tions. [11]
Another solution that anticipates anchor bolt mis-
placement is for the structural designer to detail
oversized holes in the base plates that are even
larger than the oversized holes allowed by Table
 6-1 on page 6-12, Manual of Steel Construction,
VoL II, Connections. [11] Plate washers with bolt
holes 1/16 inch larger than the bolt diameter are
then welded to the base plate. This solution allows
additional tolerances in setting the anchor bolts.
The plate washer is placed between the top nut
and the top of the base plate, and is welded to the
base plate after the column is erected and aligned.
A bottom plate washer is required above the
bottom leveling nut. This bottom plate washer is
not really added material because it will also be
needed with the standard oversized holes. See
the following detail for anchor bolt, nut, and plate
details.
Anchor Bolts That Resist Uplift, Overturning,
and Shear. For anchor bolts designed to resist
uplift, overturning, and shear from building design
loads, corrective work may be limited to:
· Slotting the base plate or column angle holes.
· Fabricating a base plate to match the misplaced
bolts.
· Chipping out the concrete, removing the mis-
placed bolts, and concreting in new, correctly
placed bolts (in the extreme case).

COLUMN

EXTRA OVERSIZE HOLE

IN BASE PLATE
WASHER

PLATE

GROUT FORM

- C%OUT%_.-E- B

x_ PLATE
/
WASHER
/ /
•. NOT REQUIRED IF
LEVELING NUT • SHIMS ARE USED
CONCRETE / / / , • /
/// ,ANCHOR
/ /

BASE PLATE DETAIL

Exercise caution before using this detail. If the

anchor bolts are designed to resist column shear
forces (see below), the anchor bolts must be
designed to resist bending because shear forces
to the bolts are applied at the plate washer--which
may be a few inches above the surface of the
concrete.
3 . R o t a t e d A n c h o rB o l t P a t t e r n
Problem Anchor bolt patterns that are rotated 90 degrees
may be corrected using the procedures listed for
The erector discovers anchor bolts placed with the misplaced anchor bolts.
anchor bolt pattern rotated 90 degrees from the
detailed orientation. S u r v e y of Bolts. When the anchor bolts are
surveyed before fabrication, the base plates may
possibly be fabricated to match the bolt spacing, or
the base plates may possibly be rotated on the
I I l columns. Correction methods are discussed in
"Some Practical Aspects of Column Base Selec-
tion.'' [5]

Case H i s t o r y .
On a 20-story building in San
O 1 • - - O Francisco, California, the steel erector surveyed
I I I the as-built location of anchor bolts. The
contractor's superintendent, John, was an "old
timer" and took much pride in his work. He
carefully explained to the surveyor, with his fore-
Detailed men present, that he personally supervised the
Orientation anchor bolt installation. All the bolts were at the
correct elevation, were exactly spaced, and were
"right on" the column lines. After the survey was
complete, the surveyor reported the results to
I I I John, with his foremen present. The surveyor
- - 0 - - + O--
stated all the bolts were at the exact elevation,
correctly spaced, and "right on" the columns lines.
John smiled. But when the surveyor told him the
- - + .. +--
bolts on column lines B2 and B3 were rotated 90
degrees, his smile disappeared. And no matter
how he measured the bolts, they were still rotated
--O--+ - 0 - - 90 degrees.
I I I
As-Built
Orientation

Solution

Uniform Spacing. One means to prevent rotated

anchor bolt patterns is to use uniform bolt spacing.
As stated by David T. Ricker in Steel TIPS, 'q'he
possibility of foundation errors will be
reduced...when anchor bolt spacing is kept uni-
form throughout the job." [12] If a square anchor
bolt pattern is used, a rotated pattern cannot
occur. So the ultimate uniform spacing is to design
a square anchor bolt pattern--if possible.

9
4. Inadequate Anchor Bolts for Column Erection
Problem
After reviewing the anchor bolt and column base
design, the erector discovers the anchor bolt and
base plate design do not provide for adequate
resistance to overturning of columns during erec-
tion. This problem can occur when:
· Only two anchor bolts are provided, leveling
plates are not used, and shims or wedges cannot
be placed under the base plate.
· The structural designer or detailer has not made
provisions for the anchor bolts to resist lateral
forces on the free-standing columns.
Solution
Overturning of Column. After the column is set
on a leveling plate, or on anchor bolt leveling nuts,
or on shims, or on a base plate, the anchor bolt and
base plate design must be capable of resisting
overturning caused by lateral forces on the col-
umn. The lateral forces may consist of wind, other
steel members striking the column, erection equip-
ment striking the Column, or even ironworker con-
nectors at the column top. Chapter 6, page 6-12,
in the AISC Manual of Steel Construction, Volume
II, Connections, mentions overturning due to acci-
dental collisions during erection. [11] Overturning
is also discussed in "Some Practical Aspects of
Column Selection." [5] Overturning is usually not
a problem when the anchor bolts and column base
are designed to resist overturning and uplift from
building design loads.
Prevent the Problem. The best method to pre-
vent the above problem is to perform proper plan-
ning for anchor bolt and base plate design. Proper
planning means:
· The erector lets the steel detailer know what
lateral loads the column base design must resist.
A specified lateral load from any direction at the
column top is provided to handle wind or objects
striking the column.
· The erector coordinates foundation construction
with the general contractor to make certain shims
may be placed under column bases with onlytwo
anchor bolts when leveling plates are not used.
· The steel erector requests four-bolt anchor bolt
patterns when leveling plates are not used. The
column is then landed on four supporting leveling
nuts. Shims under the base plate may also be
added to help resist overturning.
If proper planning is not performed, the steel
erector may face a safety problem while erecting
the columns. The column may need to be guyed-
off before the lifting line is released. But guys also
present another safety hazard because guys are
not easy to see and something may run into or
strike the guy. Steel struts similar to tilt-up wall
struts may be used. Struts present a less hazard-
ous situation because they are easily seen and
take up less space.
Tall, unsupported columns may require an erec-
tion engineer to analyze the column base (anchor
bolts). For example, an airplane hangar had 90-
foot high columns with trusses at the top. The
column bases had multiple anchor bolts that tied
the column base to the foundation. The columns
were 30 inches deep and 12 inches wide. The bolt
design provided adequate support in the strong
direction of the column, but inadequate support in
the weak direction. The steel erector solved the
problem by erecting a column "bent" consisting of
two columns and the fill-in beams. This "bent"
gave adequate resistance in the weak direction.
The ironworkers still did not trust support in the
strong direction, so they added wire rope guys.
After all, the ironworkers had to be at the column
top to connect the trusses.
Case History. Even with the proper column base
design, the steel erector must still be cautious. On
one industrial building, the owner scheduled a
small ceremony for the first column erected. The
column was set on four anchor bolt leveling nuts,
the top nuts were tightened, and the column was
then released from the lifting line. The column
promptly fell over because the column had only
been tack-welded to the base plate. What a way
to start? Needless to say, the steel erector made
a big impression at the ceremony.
5. One-Bolt Connections

lit
Problem

While reviewing the design drawings, the erector

discovers the structural designer has provided a
connection with no bolts, or with only one bolt.
t I
Code Requirements. The Construction Safety
Orders, Section 1710(c)(1 ), states:

During the final placing of solid web struc-

tural members, the load shall not be re- No Bolt
leased from the hoisting line until the mem-
bers are secured with not less than two
bolts, or the equivalent at each connection
to keep members from rolling and to sustain
anticipated loads. Bolts shall be drawn up
wrench tight. [13]
T IL I
The term "solid web structural member" is in-
tended to mean a beam, channel, girder, or even
a column standing vertically connected at one
end. The two bolts are required to keep the beam
from rolling and to sustain erection loads. Almost
all bolted members are designed with at least two One Bolt
bolts just to take the design load. However, some
welded members may show no bolts.
Solution
Work Practices. Apart from the requirements of
Section 1710(c)(1), two bolts are also required to Provide for Two Bolts. The erector should make
allow the ironworker connector to "connect" the provisions in its estimate for at least two bolt
beam in a safe, quick, and economical manner. connections on all members. During steel detail-
The ironworker will place the tapered shaft of a ing, the erector should coordinate with the fabrica-
spud wrench in one bolt hole, place a bolt in the tor, detailer, and structural designer to make pro-
second bolt hole, and then be able to remove the visions for the required two bolts.
spud wrench shaft to place the second bolt, if the
second bolt is required. If only one bolt hole is Tube Bracing. Steel tube bracing members
provided, the connector obviously cannot use that present special problems to the erector. A typical
bolt hole for both the connecting spud wrench and tube bracing design provides for a slotted end to fit
a bolt. Certain steel members can be erected over a gusset plate. The tube is then fillet-welded
without any bolts, or with only one bolt. However, to the plate. As mentioned under "Problem," the
erection costs are increased because the member design drawings may show no bolts, or only one
must be held with the load line until the single bolt bolt to allow for erection of the tube.
can be placed, or, in the case of no bolts, a
temporary weld is made. The steel tube should not be subject to the provi-
sions of Section 1710(c)(1 ) because it is not a solid
Tubes. Steel tubes, commonly used as bracing web member. Further, the slotted ends will keep
members in braced frames, may be shown on the the tube from rolling when the load line is released.
design drawings without any erection bolts, or with However, the ironworker connector still needs at
only one erection bolt. See the following two least two bolts at each end of the tube to safely
details for examples of this situation. make the connection.
 Erection Angles on Tubes. The following Detail
A shows how one erector solves the two-bolt
problem by using erection angles atthe ends of the
tube. The two bolts in the erection angle at the top
end of the tube allow the ironworker connector to
safely connect that end of the tube first. The two
slotted bolt holes in the connection angle at the
bottom of the tube allow that end of the tube to be
connected with a spud wrench. This method
presents the following problems:
· Long slots in the tube are difficult to make in the
shop and difficult to fit-up and weld in the field.
· The tube is required to be erected by first posi-
tioning the tube in the same vertical plane as the
gusset plates and then swinging it in into posi-
tion--a task not readily accomplished, if at all.
· Panel geometry may not allow the tube to be
erected unless the tube angles, gusset plates,
and tube slots are specially shaped and the
bottom gusset plate is shipped loose.
Plates on Tubes. The following Detail B shows
how structural engineer William C. Honeck solves
both the two-bolt problem and difficult erection
2
problem by using plates shop-welded to the ends
of the tube. This method has the following advan-
tages:
· The fabricator makes a block and short slot at
each end of the tube instead of the difficult long
slot.
· The difficult positioning of the long slot to the
gusset plate is eliminated.
· The tube is easier to erect and can always be
erected because it is simply brought in sideways.
Long Bolts. An alternate solution is to place two
erection bolts through the tube and gusset plate.
This solution has problems because when the
long bolts are tightened to fit up the slot to the
gusset plate, the tube sides may bend in.
Other Tube Connections. For other tube end
connections, see the article by Lawrence A. Kloiber
titled, "Designing Architecturally Exposed Steel
Tubes," in the March 1993 issue of Modern Steel
Construction. [14] However, the one-boltconnec-
tions illusl]'ated in that article are not recommended.
 NOTES: 1. REQUEST APPROVAL FROM ENGINEER TO
LET ANGLES REMAIN IN PLACE.
2. THIS DETAIL IS MEANT TO ILLUSTRATE THE
USE OF ANGLES ON THE ENDS OF THE TUBE.
SEE COMMENTS IN THE "SOLUTION" FOR
PROBLEMS WITH THIS DETAIL,

•k

Z ERECTION BOLTS

/ ,

-/
V l/

LONG SLOTTED HOLES IN ANGLE

Z 3x3x 3,8 WITH TWO

DETAIL A
ANGLES ON ENDS OF TUBE - SLOT IN TUBE

13
 THIS DETAIL PRODUCES A VERY SMALL ECCENTRICITY
THAT CAUSES BENDING IN THE BRACING MEMBER,
THIS BENDING SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN THE
DESIGN OF THE BRACE.

REGULAR HOLES FOR

TWO ERECTION BOLTS

T U B E PL

OPTIONAL
FIELD OR
SHOP WELD

• • GUSSET PL

LONG SLOI-FED HOLES INTUBE PLATE

FOR TWO ERECTION BOLTS
TUBE PLATE ON G
L OF TUBE • •
AND WORK GL

DETAIL B
PLATES ON ENDS OF TUBE

14
6. Columns or Bents Tied Together With Non-Bolted Steel Joists
Problem
The design drawings show columns or bents (par-
tial steel frames) tied together with steel joists that
have welded end anchorages (no bolts). This
condition is unacceptable to the erector because:
· The Construction Safety Orders, Section
1710(c)(3) states:
In steel framing, where bar joists are utilized,
and columns are not framed in a least two
directions with structural steel members, a
bar joist shall be field-bolted at columns to
provide lateral stability during construction.
[13]
· The welded connection provides no fit-up for
spacing adjacent columns or frames.
· The Steel Joist Institute (SJI) requires bolted end
anchorages for joists at column lines to provide
lateral stability during construction.
Solution
If the erector discovers column line joists with
welded end anchorages, the erector should:
· Condition its bid for bolted end anchorages.
· Work with the detailer, fabricator, joist supplier,
and structural designer to provide bolted end
anchorages.
If for some reason the column line joists are
delivered to the jobsite without bolted end anchor-
ages, the erector must provide the required bolt
holes in the field.
The SJI Standard Specifications Load Tables and
Weight Tables for Steel Joists and Joist Girders,
and Technical Digest, No. 9, Handling and Erec-
tion of Steel Joists and Joist Girders are must
references for joist design, fabrication, and erec-
tion. [15, 16]
15
 7. Steel Joists Without Bolted Bridging
Problem
Open web steel joists are furnished without bolted
bridging required for proper and safe erection.
Code Requirements. The Construction Safety
Orders, Section 1710(c)(4) states:
Where Iongspan joists or trusses, 40 feet or
longer, are used rows of bridging shall be
installed to provide lateral stability during
construction prior to slacking of hoisting
line. [13]
Industry Procedures. The Steel Joist Institute's
(SJI) Standard Specifications Load Tables and
Weight Tables for Steel Joists and Joist Girders
gives various requirements for erecting joists. [15]
For example, Section 6, "Handling and Erection,"
for K-Series steel joists requires bolted diagonal
bridging to be installed on certain joists before the
hoisting cables are released. The SJI Technical
Digest, No. 9, Handling and Erection of Steel
Joists and Joist Girders, also discusses stability of
joists and required bolted bridging. [16]
Solution
Joist Design. The structural designer must be
cautious when designing steel joists or using pre-
engineered joists. If the designer shows bridging
details, then care must be taken to follow the
handling and erection requirements of the Steel
Joist Institute. The Institute's requirements meet
the requirements of the Construction Safety Or-
ders.
16
The erector should review the design drawings
and work with the fabricator and joist supplier to
make certain that the required bolted bridging is
furnished.
Assemble Joists. The erector can assemble
groups of joists on the ground, complete with
bridging, and erect the assembled group to stand
alone as a laterally stable unit. This method of
erecting joists also solves the problem of erectors
working on highly unstable joists. Section 6,
"Handling and Erection," in Reference 15, also
states:
When it is necessary for the erector to climb
on the joists to install the bridging, extreme
caution must be exercised since unbridged
joists may exhibit some degree of instability
under the erector's weight.
Case History. On one project, a metal deck
foreman happened to walk on the top chord of a
newly erected joist that had no bridging installed.
The joist moved laterally and the foreman fell off.
The joist erector was following proper erection
procedures, and had reviewed those procedures
with the metal deck contractor. The foreman had
a momentary lapse of safety procedures. This
example illustrates that the required joist erection
procedures are not to be taken lightly by the
structural designer or erector.
8. Columns or Bents Tied in With Timber
Problem
The structural designer produces a building de-
sign that uses a combination of timber beams and
steel bents (partial steel frames) in order to reduce
costs. The timber beams tie the steel bents
together. The combined frame is usually laterally
stabilized by horizontal and vertical plywood dia-
phragms in the timber direction.
Erection Supports. The steel erector has the
problem of determining how to temporarily sup-
port the steel bents. The steel framing is obviously
a non-self-supporting steel frame as specified in
Section 7.9, 'q'emporary Support of Structural
Steel Frames," in the AISC Code of Standard
Practice. [1] The erector must furnish adequate
temporary supports as required by the Code. The
erector is also governed by Section 1710(a), "Brac-
ing,'' of the Construction Safety Orders. [13]
Solution
Designate in Contract. First of all, the structural
designer must realize the problems inherent in a
combination design of steel frames and timber tie-
in beams. Section 7.9.3 in the Code of Standard
Practice states in part, "Such frames shall be
clearly designated as 'non-self-supporting.'" [1 ] If
the structural designer does not make that state-
ment in the contract documents, then the steel
erector may make a claim against the owner.
All-Steel Frame. One solution to the temporary
support problem is for the steel erector to ap-
proach the fabricator, contractor, and structural
designer to replace the timber beams on the
column lines with steel beams. Then, at least the
erector will have an all-steel frame that will be
easier and safer to temporarily support. Ofcourse,
the best solution from the steel industry's view-
point is to ask the structural designer to replace all
the timber beams with steel beams.
Support Methods. If the structural designer
cannot change or modify the design, then the steel
erector is faced with the problem of determining
how to erect the steel and furnish temporary
supports that provide the required lateral stability
with the least hazardous working conditions. Any
method the erector chooses to erect the steel and
timber will present greater safety hazards than the
hazards in erecting an all-steel frame.
Some methods the erector can follow are to:
1. Erect the steel bents supported in all directions
and then leave the jobsite. This solution presents
a hazardous condition because other trades might
run into or remove the supports---especially if wire
rope guys are used. Temporary horizontal steel
struts between the steel bents will allow the use of
less hazardous wire rope "X" bracing in lieu of the
undesirable wire rope guys.
2. Work with the carpenters and erect the steel
concurrently with the timber beams. This method
presents the hazards of two trades working to-
gether, and one relying on the other--not the best
of conditions. Temporary supports will still be
required, and the ironworkers and other trades will
probably not end the project on the best of terms.
3. Use a combination of methods 1 and 2.
Case History. On a recent project, a combination
steel bent and timber beam structure with four
levels of steel was used. The erector chose
method I above--erect the steel, guy it off, and
leave the jobsite. The bents were supported with
wire rope "X" bracing in the steel frame direction
and wire rope guys in the timber beam direction. In
the timber beam direction, the columns were guyed-
off at three floor levels to anchors in the concrete
basement floor. Guys at the third level were so
steep, their ability to prevent lateral displacement
was questionable. Fortunately, the frame did not
collapse. However, the carpenters had to con-
stantly make adjustments to the plywood dia-
phragms in order to keep the building plumb. The
question might be asked, "Would an all-steel frame
have been more efficient and economical?"
 9. Steel Columns or Partial Bents Not Tied In
Problem
The structural designer produces a building de-
sign that uses a combination of steel and other
building materials. Steel columns may be com-
pletely tied in by timber or concrete, or partial steel
bents may be tied in by concrete. A variety of
designs may exist, but all of them require tempo-
rary supports by the steel erector.
Similar Problem. This problem is similar to the
problem, "Columns or Bents Tied in With Timber."
But this problem presents a more hazardous con-
struction condition because the steel is, for the
most part, unsupported free-standing columns
with an irregular steel beam pattern.
Erection Supports. The steel erector has the
problem of determining how to temporarily sup-
port the steel members. The steel members are
obviously a non-self-supporting steel frame as
specified in Section 7.9, "Temporary Support of
Structural Steel Frames," in the AISC Code of
Standard Practice. [1] The erector must furnish
adequate temporary supports as required by the
Code. The erector is also governed by Section
1710(a), "Bracing," of the Construction Safety
Orders. [13]
Solution
Designate in Contract. The structural designer
must realize the problems inherent in a combina-
tion design of steel and other materials. Section
7.9.3 in the Code of Standard Practice states in
part, "Such frames shall be clearly designated as
_non-self-supporting._" [1] Although the steel
members are obviously non-self-supporting, the
structural designer must make a statement in the
contract documents that the frames are non-self-
supporting, or the owner may be subject to a claim.
Hazardous Methods. The temporary supports
determined by the steel erector will present a
varying degree of safety hazards depending on
the type of supports. One method of temporary
18
support is to guy-off the columns with wire rope
guys that are anchored to the concrete floor or
concrete footings. This solution presents an ex-
tremely hazardous condition because the wire
rope guys will interfere with construction opera-
tions of the steel erector and the othertrades. If the
wire rope guy is struck by construction equipment
or materials being hoisted, or if the wire rope guy
is accidentally slacked-off by a worker who thinks,
"It is in the way," a disastrous accident can occur.
Such an accident did occur on a high-rise building
in Toronto, Canada, when a wire rope guywas cut
by another trade because it was in the way. Wire
rope guys are also subject to a multitude of prob-
lems that must be constantly monitored. For
example, the wire rope clamps must be properly
placed and checked to make certain they have not
been loosened. Turnbuckles must also be con-
stantly observed to make certain they have not
been slacked-off or tampered with. Wire rope
guys may be the most economical and easiest
type of temporary support to install, but they present
the most hazardous safety condition.
Another safer, temporary support is to provide
rigid struts from the steel members to the concrete
floor or footings. Struts are more visible than wire
rope guys and can take more physical abuse.
Case History. The steel erector should take
advantage of adjacent existing structures to stabi-
lize the steel being erected. For example, on one
project 200-foot-long trusses were erected around
three sides of an existing hangar. On two sides of
the hangar the new columns were temporarily
braced to the existing columns with angle frames.
These frames:
· Stabilized the long free-standing columns.
· Located the columns for vertical alignment.
· Stabilized the truss bents until bottom chord
members could be connected.
No wire rope guys were required, which made the
steel erector and the contractor very happy.
10. Non-Self-Supporting Steel Frames
Problem
The structural designer produces a building de-
sign where the completed steel frame is not stable.
Section 7.9.3 in the AISC Code of Standard Prac-
tice defines this type of steel frame as a non-self-
supporting steel frame. [1] The AISC definition is:
Solution
A non-self-supporting steel frame is one
that, when fully assembled and connected,
requires interaction with other elements not
classified as Structural Steel to provide sta-
bility and strength to resist loads for which
the frame is designed.
Designate in Contract. Such frames are re-
quired to be clearly designated as "non-self-sup-
porting" in the contract documents. The Code of
Standard Practice defines contract documents to
mean the contract, plans, and specifications. The
structural designer must convey the "non-self-
supporting" designation, preferably on the struc-
tural drawings (plans). If the structural designer
does not make such a designation on the draw-
ings, then the owner may receive claims for extra
work from the steel erector and contractor. If the
drawings are not so designated and the steel
erector does not realize the non-self-supporting
condition, and if a construction failure occurs, then
the structural designer may wish the steel frame
had been designed as a self-supporting frame.
New Code. The AISC recently issued a new
version of the Code of Standard Practice, effective
June 10, 1992. This version replaces the Septem-
ber 1, 1986 version contained in the Manual of
Steel Construction. [6] Significant changes are
made to Section 7.9.3, "Non-Self-Supporting Steel
Frames." Hopefully, these changes will alleviate
controversies that resulted from varied interpreta-
tions of language in the September 1, 1986 ver-
sion.
Erector Furnishes Supports. The steel erector
is required to furnish and install temporary sup-
ports for the erection operation for both self-sup-
porting and non-self-supporting steel frames. See
Section 1710 of the Construction Safety Orders,
and Section 7.9 of the AISC Code of Standard
Practice. [13, 1] For many erectors, furnishing
temporary supports for self-supporting frames is a
difficult task. Furnishing supports for a non-self-
supporting frame may tax the resources of the
erector. Then if the non-self-supporting frame is
not designated as such in the contract documents,
and the erector does not realize this condition until
work is started, the erector may have extreme
difficulty in erecting the frame.
Designate on Drawings. The most obvious
solution, and the course of action required by steel
industry practice, is for the structural designer to
designate non-self-supporting frames in the con-
tract documents. See page 26 of "Structural Steel
Construction in the '90s," in Steel TIPS. [17] If the
"non-self-supporting" designation is made on the
drawings, erectors will be able to determine during
the bidding or negotiating period if they can cope
with the problems presented by such frames.
Analyze Frames. As a second line of defense, the
erector might be wise to use the services of an
erection engineer to analyze any suspicious-look-
ing frames. Even the most experienced erectors
may miss the fact that a frame is non-self-support-
ing when that designation is not made in the
contract documents. Section 1710(b) in the Con-
struction Safety Orders, requires a civil engineer
currently registered in California to prepare an
erection plan for trusses and beams over 25 feet
long. [13] Hopefully, the engineer would discover
that the frame is non-self-supporting.
Examples. Some examples of non-self-support-
ing frames are:
· Concrete shear walls that attach to a non-mo-
ment steel frame--after the steel is erected.
· Column line beams that need metal deck for
lateral support to carry axial or vertical loads--
and the deck is not in place.
· Floor framing that needs metal deck to transfer
horizontal loads--and the metal deck is not in
place.
· Roof trusses that help provide lateral stability by
frame action--but the bottom chords cannot be
connected until all¥oof loads are applied.
· Tilt-up walls attached to the non-self-supporting
steel framo and the walls have no lateral sup-
port. See Section 7.9.3 in the Commentary on
the Code of Standard Practice. [2]
19
 11. Column Splices Too Low or Too High Above Floor
Problem
On one tier building, the column splices are de-
signed at 6'-0" above the top of steel. On another
tier building, the splices are designed at 3'-6"
above the top of steel. The 6'-0" splices are too
high to allow the connectors, bolters, and welders
to work without scaffolding or floats. The 3'-6"
splices are not high enough to allow safety wire
rope attachments for exposed floor edges at the
periphery of the building or at interior floor open-
ings.
Solution
Splice Design. Designthecolumnsplices atleast
4'-0" above the top of steel. This height will:
· Allow attachments for the top safety wire rope to
be placed on the column. The attachment for the
top wire rope needs to be located to provide the
correct height for both the erector and contractor,
if the contractor wants to use the wire rope
installed by the erector without moving the wire
rope.
Column attachments for the safety wire rope need
to be placed so the wire rope is located between 42
20
and 45 inches above design finish floor height as
required by Section 1710(e)(3) of the Construction
Safety Orders. [13] The 4'-0" splice meets this
height requirement for most cases. The determin-
ing factor is the floor thickness. If the floor is too
thick, the height of the column splice should be
increased. The 4'-0' height is recommended in
Chapter 6, page 6-19, of the Manual of Steel
Construction, Volume II, Connections, and by
Barry L. Barger in "What Design Engineers Can
Do to Reduce Fabrication Costs." [11, 12]
· Allow the erectors, bolters, and welders to work *
without scaffolding or floats. The article, "Value
Engineering and Steel Economy," by David T.
Ricker, in Steel TIPS, discusses splices that are
too high. [18]
· Provide for uniformity in shipping, unloading,
sorting, and erecting columns. If column splices
are designed at different heights above the floor
elevation on the same floor, or are designed with
the same tiers spliced at different floors, then
erection costs will increase.
Erector Requests. The structural designer should
consider requests from the erector to increase or
decrease the designed column splice heights.
12. Columns Interrupted by Beams
Problem
On a two-floor shopping center building, the col-
umns, rather than being one continuous piece
from the base plate to the roof, are interrupted by
the beam framing. The structural designer has
used the interrupted-column-framing system to
utilize continuous, supported beams.
Suspended Beams. In addition to thecontinuous
beams, the design utilizes cantilevers with sus-
pended beams between the two cantilevers. See
elevation sketch below. This type of design in-
creases erection and plumbing costs even more
than just continuous beams because the bent
units must be plumbed individually to allow the
suspended beams to be erected.

More Difficult Erection. The interrupted columns will Vibration. Continuous beam framing, especially
make steel erection more difficult and more costly with cantilevers, may produce a design with ex-
because: cessive vibration. This vibration is not really an
erection problem, but the ironworkers will
I • S
USP
END
EDB
EAM
S notice and comment on the vibration. And
I surely, if the ironworkers feel the vibration,
the tenants will also feel the vibration.

i ii/ II II
1 II Solution

U H In this particular case, the steel erector

Elevation
· More pieces are required to be erected.
· The columns are more difficult to plumb and keep
plumb.
· The complete frame is more difficult to plumb.
· The sequence of and direction of erection may
be limited.
must work with the design presented.
However, on future projects the structural
designer should realize the interrupted-
column design will increase the erector's
cost. Any savings visualized by using
continuous beams may be negated by the
increased erection cost. The structural designer
may want to perform a brief value engineering
exercise on using full-length columns versus inter-
rupted columns.

21
 13. Columns Offset From Beam Framing

Problem

On a tier building, some of the columns are offset

from the beam framing grid line. See sketch
below. This offset will present erecting and deck-
ing problems to the steel erector.

mB
J T
T
OFFSET

F F•

FLOOR PLAN

Solution

If possible, the structural designer should arrange

the framing so the columns and beams are tied
together on the main column lines without offsets.
Keeping the framing on common column lines
allows for more efficient loading, erecting, and
decking procedures. Also, lateral loads from erec-
tion equipment are more easilytransmitted through
the floor framing system.

22
14. Revisions and Alternates Not Flagged on Drawings
Problem
Design drawings are issued without revisions high-
lighted, marked, or flagged to clearly indicate the
revisions. The fabricator and erector do not notice
the revisions. During construction, the structural
designer, contractor, or owner asks, "Why is that
door framing there?," or in an extreme case, "Isn't
the weld on those box columns too small?"
or
During bidding, the bid form and specifications
request and describe alternates, but the drawings
do not clearly indicate the alternates. As a result,
the fabricator and erector miss the scope of an
alternate. During construction, the structural de-
signer, contractor, or owner asks, "Where is eleva-
tor No. 6 going to fit?."
Solution
Indicate on Drawings. The structural designer
must clearly indicate revisions and alternates on
the design drawings by:
· Using the standard symbol for a revision.
· Placing a "cloud" around the revision or alter-
nate, and identifying the cloud with the revision
symbol or alternate number.
· Using some other highlighting or flagging method
to show the revision or alternate.
By Fabricator and Erector. The fabricator and
erector must follow the above practice whenever
they make revisions to their shop, erection, and
erection scheme drawings.
Flagging. "Flagging" revisions is discussed by
Bob Petroski, Eugene Miller, and David T. Ricker
in the article, "What Design Engineers Can Do to
Reduce Fabrication Costs," in Steel TIPS. [12]
23
 15. Double-Framed Beam Connections to Girder

Problem are removed, the connection no longer complies

with the requirements of Section 1710(c)(1 ) of the
If two opposing beams, each with double framing Construction Safely Orders. [13] This section
angles, connect to the same girder and share requires each end of a beam to be secured with not
common bolt holes, an erection safety hazard less than two bolts before the hoisting line is
exists. This type of connection is shown in Detail released.
A • below. Detail A---4 is shown on page 5 of
Solution

L To avoid this hazardous connection, design the

connection as shown in Detail A--1 on page 4 of
Steel Connections/Details and Relative Costs.
[19] Connection Detail A - - l , shown below, uses
single shear tabs (plates) shop-welded to the
carrying girder and field-bolted to the beams.

DOUBLE FRAMING ANGLES

SHOP AND FIELD BOLTED

,,,A--4--. .-.f,.
Relative Cost
1.05 t
Whereas the previous connections of this series have employed
single shear elements, A-4 is the standard connection consisting of
double framing angles which are both shop and field bolted. The SHOP WELDED TAB-FIELD H.S. BOLTED
Rela•ve Cost Index of A-4 is 5% above the single tab shear base
connection A-l, but large beam loading could influence the eco- =..A--1 . . ,
nomics and use this connection relative to A-1 because of an Relative Cost
increase in weld size. There is a safety hazard in erection when 1.00
using this connection. Placing pins and bolts while tnjing to align
two opposing beams through common holes may require the addi- Connection A-1 is the most economical for this series of shear con-
tion of seat angles on one or both sides of the girder to keep the nections and is assigned a Relative Cost Index of 1.00. This connec-
beam in position. Eliminating this hazard, as required by OSHA tion employs a single shear tab shop welded to the carrying girder
laws, will add additional cost to this connection. and field bblted to the beam.

Steel Connections/Details and Relative Costs. Detail A--1 provides a more economical connec-
[19] Note: Both the detail and complete accompa- tion than Detail A--4, because it provides for safer
nying comments are shown. Portions of the com- erection, faster erection, and better ironworker
ments regard relative costs for both shop and field, morale. As stated byW. A. Thornton in Steel TIPS,
may refer to a detail sequence, and may not apply "As this example illustrates, single angles will work
to the subject matter of this problem. However, the even in heavy industrial applications, and they are
complete comments are shown because the rela- much less expensive than double angles, espe-
tive costs should be of interest to most readers. cially for erection." [20]
This note also applies to details in subsequent
problems that are taken from Steel Connections/
Details and Relative Costs.
The hazard exists because the ironworker must
remove the bolts from the first beam connected, in
order to connect the second beam. Once the bolts

24
16. Double-Framed Beam Connections to Column Web
Problem

If two opposing beams, each with double framing
angles, connect to the same column web and
share common bolt holes, an erection safety haz-
ard exists. Additionally, beam erection and bolt
access is difficult. This type of connection is
shown in Details BW--4 and BW--5 below. These
details are shown on page 9 of SteelConnections/
Details and Relative Costs (Steel TIPS). [19]

1· RETURN

1
SHOP WELDED ANGLES TO BEAM DOUBLE ANGLES
H.S. BOLTED TO COLUMN WEB SHOP AND FIELD H.S. BOLTED

--- B W - - 4 - - - ,,-,,BW--5 = · =
Relative Cost Relative Cost
1.20 1.30

Double angle connections BW-4 and BW-5 have relative costs of 1.20 and 1.30. The shop-welded angles are
slightly less. Installation of these connections is hazardous because of the difficulty in placing pins or erection
bolts through common holes. Addition of angle seats under the beams may be necessary to keep the beams from
falling. The relative costs of BW-4 and BW-5 will then be even higher than those noted. Use of connections BW-
4 and BW-5 may not be possible at columns with moment connections to the flanges because continuity plates
or stiffeners, as shown in the "CF" series connections, would interfere with entry of the beam. A design engineer
may wish to use connections similar to BW-1 or BW-2 to avoid this problem as well as to take advantage of the
obvious economies.

25
 The hazard exists because the ironworker must
remove the bolts from the first beam connected in
order to connect the second beam. Once the bolts
are removed, the connection no longer complies
with Section 1710(c)(1) of the Construction Safety
Orders. [13] This section requires each end of a
beam to be secured with not less than two bolts
before the hoisting line is released.

Solution

To avoid this hazardous connection, design the

connection as shown in Detail BW--1 on page 8 of
Steel Connections/Details and Relative Costs (Steel
TIPS). [19] Connection Detail BW--1, shown be-
low, uses single shear tabs (plates) and horizontal
stiffener plates shop-welded to the column with the
single shear plates field-bolted to the beams.
Detail BW--1 provides a more economical connec-
tion than Details BW--4 or BW--5, because it
provides for safer erection, faster and easier erec-
tion, easy bolt accessibility, and better ironworker
morale.

COL. FLG.

SHOP WELDED TAB AND PLATES

FIELD H.S. BOLTED
, , ,BW--1 ,,,
Relative Cost
1.00

For simple shear connection to column web the base 1.00 index
connection BW-1 has a single vertical plate welded to the column
web with horizontal stiffener plates (normally 1/2" thick) welded at
its top and bottom. The bolt holes are located outside the toe of the
column flanges, which allows for easy erection entry of the beam as
well as accessibility for impacting the high strength bolts.

26
17. Mixed Bolts
Problem
The structural drawings show a mixed "bag of
bolts" throughout the structure. Different kinds of
bolts shown include:
· A325 bearing bolts in single-plate shear connec-
tions for the connections of fill-in beams. Some
of the connections require a snug-tight condition
of the bolts to prevent moment transfer. Other
connections allow snug-tight or fully-tightened
bolts.
· A325 slip-critical bolts and A490 slip-critical bolts
for beam-to-column web connections at the same
column work point.
· A325 slip-critical bolts and A490 slip-critical bolts
for bracing connections at the same work point.
Bolt Design on Most Projects. The majority of
projects are designed with only one kind of bolt--
fully-tightened A325 bolts. Designing for different
kinds of bolts requires additional quality control,
with resulting added cost, to prevent the erector
from installing the wrong kind of bolt. Additional
quality control includes the following actions:
· The fabricator (or erector) must prepare an erec-
tion drawing that shows--in addition to the bolt
diameter and length---whether the bolt is A325,
A490, slip-critical (fully-tightened), bearing (snug-
tight or fully-tightened), or bearing (snug-tight
only).
· The erector must not only distribute A325 and
A490 bolts of the correct diameter and length to
the work points, but must make certain that the
A325 and A490 bolts are installed in the correct
connection at a work point.
· The erector must set up procedures and checks
to make certain that bearing bolts required to be
snug-tight are not accidentally fully-tightened.
· The inspector must set up procedures to deter-
mine that each kind of bolt is properly installed
and tightened.
Solution
Bolt Design. The possibility of the erector using
the wrong kind of bolt can be reduced or elimi-
nated, and costs reduced, if:
· A325 and A490 bolts are not used at the same
connection point.
· The use of A490 bolts is limited to similar connec-
tions throughout the job--say all 36-inch-deep
beams, or all bracing connections.
· The single-plate shear connections are designed
to allow fully-tightened bearing bolts. This design
assumes some transfer of moment is allowed.
Fully-tightened bolts should be allowed because
allowable loads for single-plate shear connec-
tions as tabulated in Table X on page 4-52 in the
Manual of Steel Construction are based on fully-
tightened or snug-tight bearing bolts. [6]
Steel erectors have discovered that the difference
in cost of installing snug-tight bearing bolts, fully-
tightened bearing bolts, and slip-critical bolts (fully-
tightened) is not distinguishable. Let's look at the
installation requirements for bearing bolts. Sec-
tion 8(c), "Joint Assembly and Tightening of Shear/
Bearing Connections," in the "Specification for
Structural Joints Using ASTM A325 or A490 Bolts,"
in the Manual of Steel Construction states:
Bolts in connections.., shall be installed in
properly aligned holes, but need only be
tightened to the snug tight condition. The
snug tight condition is defined as the tight-
ness that exists when all plies in a joint are
in firm contact. This may be attained by a
few impacts of an impact wrench or the full
effort of a man using an ordinary spud
wrench. [6]
So after figuring out which bolts are bearing bolts,
the ironworker now has a choice of using the full
effort of a spud wrench or a few impacts of an
impact wrench. The choice is obvious. The
ironworker will use the impact wrench, and prob-
ably fully tighten the bolts, whether or not the bolts
need full tightening.
Bolt Uniformity. As stated by David T. Ricker, in
"What Design Engineers Can Do to Reduce Fab-
rication Costs," in Steel TIPS:
Bolt Uniformity. Minimizing the number of
diameters and types of bolts on a given job
lessens the chance for a mixup in the shop
or field... [12]
27
 18. Mixed Diameter Bolts
Problem
The structural drawings show various bolt diam-
eters. The different diameters of bolts increases
the chance for the wrong bolts to be supplied or
installed. Additionally, installation cost is increased
due to added quality control, more supervision,
more tools, and tool changes.
Solution
Bolt Uniformity. The structural designer should
be aware that different diameters of bolts will add
to the fabrication and bolting cost. As stated by
David T. Ricker in "What Design Engineers Can
Do to Reduce Fabrication Costs," in Steel TIPS:
Bolt Uniformity. Minimizing the number of
diameters and types of bolts on a given job
lessens the chance for a mixup in the shop
or field and allows more efficiency in drilling
or punching operations. [12]
19. Reuse of High-Strength Bolts
Problem
To correct alignment of exterior beams connected
with A325 slip-critical bolts, the erector loosens
and retightens some bolts and loosens, removes,
reinstalls, and retightens other bolts. However,
the inspector and engineer claim that retightening
the bolts constitutes reuse of the bolts, and they
request that the bolts be replaced.
Solution
Reuse of A325 Bolts. The "Specification for
Structural Joints Using ASTM A325 or A490 Bolts"
(Specification) in Part 5 of the Manual of Steel
28
Minimize Number of Diameters. If structural
drawings require several diameters of bolts, the
erector should work with the fabricator and struc-
tural designer to minimize the number of diam-
eters to be used. For example:
· Replace large-diameter machine boits with
smaller-diameter A325 bolts to match other A325
bolt diameters.
· Keep the A325 bolt diameters the same by using
either more or less bolts.
· Limit the number of bolt diameters. Instead of
using 3/4-inch, 7/8-inch, 1 -inch, and 11/B-inch diam-
eters, try to use just 7/8-inch and 1 -inch diameters.
· Avoid using large-diameter A490 bolts. 13/8-inch
and 11/2-inch diameter A490 bolts require bigger,
heavier, and more costly equipment to tighten
the bolts. Some erectors do not have this equip-
ment. Further, the ironworkers certainly don't
like to use the heavy equipment.
Construction, prohibits the reuse of A490 bolts
and galvanized A325 bolts, but allows the reuse of
other A325 bolts, if approved by the responsible
engineer. [6]
The steel erector should bring to the attention of
the inspector and engineer Section 8(e), page 5-
276, "Reuse of Bolts," in the Specification. The
Specification, along with the AISC recommenda-
tions on page 17 in Quality Criteria andlnspection
Standards (AISC publication S323), should allow
the erector to obtain approval from the engineer
for the reuse of A325 bolts. [6, 7]
The "Steel Interchange" feature in Modern Steel
Construction, March 1992, contains an excellent
discussion on the reuse of non-galvanized A325
bolts. [21]
20. Prequalified and Non-Prequalified Weld Joints
Problem
Both prequalified weld joints and non-prequalified
weld joints are used in the structure. Either the
structural designer designs a connection with a
non-prequalified weld joint that requires a quali-
fied-by-test weld joint, or the erector decides that,
for cost considerations, a qualified-by-test joint is
more appropriate than a prequalified weld joint.
When problems occur using the qualified-by-test
joint, or even the prequalified joint, a finger-point-
ing contest is sometimes generated, and correc-
tive action is required.
Solution
By Welding Code. The article, "Welded Joints -
Requirements," in Part 4, page 4-152, of the
Manual of Steel Construction states in part:
AWS prequalification of a weld joint is based
upon experience that sound weld metal with
appropriate mechanical properties can be
deposited, provided work is performed in
accordance with all applicable provisions of
the Structural Welding Code. [6]
Design with Prequalified Joints. So the first
essential step for a sound weld is to design con-
nections that can use prequalified weld joints.
These joints are shown in Part 4 of the Manual of
Steel Construction, and in Section 2 of the Struc-
tural Welding Code. [6, 22]
Use Prequalified Joints. The second essential
step is for the steel erector to use prequalified weld
joints at the connections, and to follow all the
required procedures.
Qualified-By-Test Joints. If prequalified weld
joints are not used, either by necessity or by
choice, the third essential step is to use a qualified-
by-test weld joint. The AWS Structural Welding
Code sets forth the requirements for testing and
qualifying non-prequalified weld joints. [22]
Take Precautions. The fourth essential step
requires the steel erector to take precautions while
welding, and not take the attitude that a qualified
joint--prequalified or non-prequalified--will pro-
duce a successful weld. As further stated in the
article quoted above, a successful weld also re-
quires attention to:
· The magnitude, type, and distribution of forces to
be transmitted.
· Accessibility.
· Restraint to weld metal contraction. See the
problem, "Restrained Welded Joints."
· Thickness of connected material.
· Effect of residual welding stresses on connected
material.
· Distortion.
The articles, "Avoiding Weld Defects," "Correcting
Weld Defects," "Nondestructive Testing (NDT),"
and "Projects Specifications," contained in "Struc-
tural Steel Construction in the '90s," in Steel TIPS,
contain much valuable information on producing
successful welds. [17]
Welding Procedure. The essential step, and
one that is often overlooked, is for the erector to
produce a complete and comprehensive welding
procedure for each project. The welding proce-
dure should include:
· A weld sequence for both the complete frame
and the individual joint. The joint sequence
should include when beam-to-column web joints
are tightened, if the webs are bolted.
· The prequalified and qualified-by-test joint weld-
ing procedures.
· A requirement that only certified welders may be
used, and that they must be certified for the
process used and the weld position. A weld joint
may be properly designed, be prequalified, and
be thoroughly planned, but the success of the
weld produced depends on a certified and dedi-
cated ironworker making the weld.
29
 21. Extending Continuity Plate for Back-up Bar

Problem Extending the continuity plate is also recommended

on pages 4-11 and 6-55 in the AISC Manual of
In certain beam-to-column web welded moment Steel Construction, Volume II, Connections. [11]
connections, the back-up bar for the flange weld
fouls on the column flanges. Fabricator or Erector Requests. Ifthe structural
designer has not provided for an extended conti-
Solution nuity plate, the fabricator or erector will probably
request the plate to be extended. The structural
Plate Design. To provide adequate clearances designer should grant that request.
for back-up bars, design the connection with con-
tinuity plates extended beyond the column flanges.
See Detail DW--1, on page 12 of Steel Connec-
tions/Details and Relative Costs (Steel TIPS). [19]
Detail DW--1 and "Note" also discuss correct
welding of the continuity plate. For convenience,
a modified Detail DW--1 is shown below.

/
-T- tE
- - EXTENSION

T&B FLANGE > tx,

II

WEB BOLTED - FLANGE BUTT WELDED

30
22. Welded Connections to Inside of Column

Problem

The structural drawings show beam-to-column DW--4 below. Some of these welds are difficult to
web connections made with field welds inside the make because of electrode positioning, equip-
column flange areas. See Details BW--3 and ment access, welder access, and welder visibility.

NON-MOMENT CONNECTION M O M E N TC O N N E C T I O N

1" TYP.
, . • - 1 • IF REQ'D.

Itl I
I

OPTIONAL

EA. SIDE
TO COL. FLG.

SHOP WELDED SEAT- FIELD WELDED TO BEAM

•- NO TAPER
OPTIONAL
--=BW--3=== TRIM LINE
Relative Cost
1.09
The extra connection pieces as well as the drilling of holes through
the beam flange add to the cost of this connection. If the column
has moment connections to its flange with column stiffeners, the
use of this connection may be prohibited as in the cases of connec- WELDED MOMENT PLATES WITH SEAT
tions BW-4 and BW-5.

...DW--4..=
Relative Cost
1.50

Connection 0W-4, which is all welded, is not popu-

lar because of its high relative cost compared with
the first two connections in this Plate prepa-
ration and the full penelTation welding of flange
plates to the column results in an increase of the
relative cost to 50% over base connection 0W-1.

31
 Solution

To avoid the above problems, make the beam-to-

column web connections as shown in Details
B W - - 1 and D W - - 1 below. The fabricator and
erector should work with the structural designer to
change the undesirable details to the desirable
details.

N O N - M O M E N TC O N N E C T I O N M O M E N TC O N N E C T I O N

) COL. FLG.
T. & B. FLANGE
/+
I

- E '1 1 M
i I

! I

WEB BOLTED- FLANGE BUTT WELDED

. . . DW--1 . . .
Relative Cost
1.00
SHOP WELDED TAB AND PLATES
FIELD H.S. BOLTED DW-1 is the base 1.00 index connection and
employs a bolted vertical web extension plate.
,,,,. BW--1 ,,-,,
Note that only fillet welds are necessary for the
Relative Cost
ver'dcal web plate. Flanges are folly welded to the
1.00
continuity plates.

For simple shear connecUon to column web the base 1.00 index
connection BW-1 has a single vertical plate welded to the column
web with horizontal stiffener plates (normally 1/2" thick) welded at
its top and bottom. The bolt holes are located outside the toe of the
column flanges, which allows for easy erection entry of the beam as
well as accessibility for impacting the high strength bolts.

All the above details are from Steel Connections/Details and Relative Costs (Steel TIPS). [19]

32
 23. Restrained Welded Joints
Problem
In beam-to-column flange moment connections,
the most economical and most common design
uses welded flanges and a high-strength bolted
web with ' bolts.
• This connection is
shown in Detail CF--1 on page 10 of Steel Con-
nections/Details and Relative Costs (Steel TIPS).
[19] Detail CF--1 is shown below.
Problems may occur on large beams with thick
flanges and deep webs. If the web bolts are
tightened before the welds are made (the most
desired erection sequence), then the welds will be
restrained by the bolts while cooling, which could
result in lamellar tearing of the column flange, or
cracked welds.
CF--1
T. & B. FLG. F--2
WEB BOLTED- FLANGE BUTT WELDED
· ==CF--1 =,, ,,=CF--2 , , ,
Relative Cost Relative Cost
1.00 1.06
For this category of connecUon, the beam-to-
column moment connection CF-1 is the base Rela-
live Cost Index 1.00 connection, with a single
shear plate being fillet welded to the column
flange. Beam flanges are fully welded to the
column flange, providing a very ductile and eco-
nomical moment connection. Attaching the shear
tab to the column with a full penetration weld
rather than a double fillet weld increases the rela-
•ve cost 6%.
Solution
Acceptable Procedure. For most beam flanges,
the structural designer should allow the web bolts
to be tightened before the welds are made. This
procedure is acceptable because:
· While the welds are cooling, the shrinkage force
in the weld will overcome the allowable load on
the bolts. The bolts will slip horizontally and go
into bearing. After the weld has cooled, the bolts
will not slip again.
· After the weld is made, the bolts will still act as
slip-critical bolts--as designed.
Special Procedures. For beams with too many
web bolts, the weld shrinkage force will not be able
to overcome the allowable bolt load. Special
design and erection procedures should be fol-
lowed, because the weld area must be allowed to
shrink. Additionally, "snugged-up" bolts may not
be able to be tightened after welding because the
bolts will bind as the weld shrinks and prevent
proper tightening. Two methods can be used to
solve the problem:
· Keep the design of bolted webs. Provide hori-
zontal slotted holes in the column shear plate for
weld shrinkage. Bolts are then fully-tensioned
after the flange welds are made.
· Change the design to welded webs. Some
erectors use horizontal slotted holes in the col-
umn shear plate for standard bolts. Other erec-
tors use standard holes in the shear plate and
use erection bolts. After the flange welds are
made, the web is then welded to the column as
shown in Detail CF---4, on page 11 of Steel
Connections/Details and Relative Costs (Steel
TIPS). [19] The web weld is restrained by the
welded flanges. However, since the weld size is
much smaller than the flange welds and distrib-
uted over a larger area of the column flange,
lamellar tearing or a cracked weld should not
occur if proper welding techniques are used.
Welding Techniques. Proper welding techniques
including preheat, peening, postheat, controlled
cooling, and electrode selection will help to avoid
defects in restrained welds. For information on
restrained welded joints see:
33
 · "Avoiding Weld Defects," on page 14 of "Struc-
tural Steel Construction in the '90s," in Steel
TIPS. [17]
· Page 4-152 in the Manual of Steel Construction.
[6]
· "Commentary on Highly Restrained Welded Con-
nections,'' AISC Engineering Journal. [23]

Records. The structural designer may require the

erector to provide proof that webs can be bolted
before successful flange welds are made. Records
of past experiences will be helpful to provide the
required proof. The records will be available if the
erector has made welding procedures for prior
projects that include a welding sequence where
the webs are bolted before the flange welds are
made.

34
24. Field-Welded Curb Angles
Problem
The structural drawings show curb angles (or bent
plates) field-welded to periphery beams with over-
head welds. See design detail below. These
overhead welds are costly and require the welder
to work on the exterior of the building--a safety
hazard not only to the welder, but to workers and
others below the welder.
Field Attachment. Two methods of field-attach-
ing the angles to provide adjustment and to avoid
the overhead welds are:
. Field-bolting. Space bolts as required.
· Field-welding with slotted plug welds near the
toe of the beam flange. Space welds as required.
See details below for these suggested two attach-
ment methods.

I V
iN PL Or ANGLE

·•' • A325 SC J
/•L VOP
!

•HOLES
IN BEAM
I @P
NOTE: P=CENTER TO CENTER
Design Detail SPACING

Solution

Tolerances. Field-adjustment of curb angles is

necessary when the alignment of the angles re- Suggested Bolting Detail
quires limits closer than the normal steel frame
alignment tolerances specified in Sections 7.11.3.1
and 7.11.3.2 in the Code of Standard Practice. [1]
When alignment of the angles is allowed to follow
the normal steel frame alignment, then the angles
are shop-welded. Tolerances for adjustable items
are specified in Section 7.11.3.3 of the Code. Do @p
not expect the steel erector to adjust the angles to • • 1 • . L VOP
a "zero tolerance."
' t '
The alignment of these adjustable items requires
an adjustable connection to accommodate mill,
fabrication, and erection tolerances. See the last
paragraph on page 48 of the Commentary on the
Code of Standard Practice. [2]

! I

Suggested Welding Detail

35
 25. Steel Floor Deck Spanning Uneven Surfaces
Problem

While placing the steel floor deck, the steel deck
contractor can not make the deck bear on adjacent
supports. This condition exists when:
· Fill-in beams or trusses with large camber are
adjacent to column line beams or trusses with
much smaller camber.
· Beams, trusses, or joists with large cambers are
adjacent to deck shelf angles attached to con-
crete walls.
The elevation differential of adjacent supports is
too great to allow the steel deck to deflect and bear
on each support. See following elevation:
STEEL FLOOR DECK 2
The saw cut is made to the top surface and vertical
surfaces of the ribs, but not the bottom surface
bearing on the beam. The resulting gap is taped
to contain the wet concrete. As the concrete is
poured, the fill-in beams will deflect and the gap
may close.
Note: The structural designer usually designs the
deck to span continuous over at least two supports
to take advantage of deck continuity over multiple
supports. This continuity reduces moment and
deflections in the deck. Before the deck is cut, the
structural designer must be notified.
The taping of gaps at butted ends is found on
page 16, Article 4.3, "Lapped and Butted
Ends," in the Design Manual for

-F
Composite Decks, Form
J • GAP Decks and Roof
, /
Decks. [24]
FILL IN COLUMN LINE BEAM OR
CONCRETE WALL WITH Roof Deck.
SHELF ANGLE The installa-
tion of steel
Deck Not Bearing
roof deck on
differential
warped sur-
Solution faces is discussed in the January 1992 issue of
Steel TIPS, titled, "Steel Deck Construction." [25]
Practical Solution. A practical, and probably the
only solution, is to saw-cut the deck at the support(s)
adjacent to the support that is not bearing. The
deck will then change from a cantilevered to a
simple span. See following elevation:

STEEL FLOOR DECK2 •SAW CUT

FILL COLUMN LINE BEAM OR

CONCRETE WALL WITH
SHELF ANGLE

Deck Bearing

36
26. Project Specifications
Problem
At times the specifications may:
· Be vague.
· Include implied statements.
· Include requirements inappropriate to the project.
· Be more restrictivethan necessaryfor the project.
For example, plumbing requirements that are
more restrictive than specified in the Code of
Standard Practice. [1]
· Require fabricator to complete design in order to
make a bid. If so, the erector must also make
assumptions.
· Conflict with the drawings or with notes and
specifications on the drawings. Note: In Califor-
nia, the structural designers typically place speci-
fication-type notes on the drawings.
· Not be written for the specific project.
· Assign work to the steel fabricator, erector, mis-
cellaneous metal contractor, etc.
Solution
Avoiding Specification Problems. The fabrica-
tor and erector must live with and comply with
specifications and drawings developed by the
structural designer. To avoid specification prob-
lems, the structural designer should:
· Either prepare the specifications following the
Construction Specifications Institute's (CSI)
Manual of Practice, or coordinate structural steel
requirements with the specification writer when
the project has a specification writer. [26] Hope-
fully, the specification writer will follow the CSI
format.
· Make certain specification-type notes placed on
the structural drawings agree with the structural
steel specification section.
· Follow the specification requirements set forth in
Section 3, "Plans and Specifications," in the
Code of Standard Practice, and the checklist
contained in Section 3 in the Commentary on the
Code of Standard Practice. [1,2]
· Review the structural steel specification sugges-
tions in "What Design Engineers Can Do to
Reduce Fabrication Costs," and in "Value Engi-
neering and Steel Economy," in Steel TIPS. [12,
18] However, items 11 and 12 in "Value Engi-
neering and Steel Economy" may be a little
misleading. Specification writers should not as-
sign work to subcontractors because the specifi-
cations are normally directed to the general con-
tractor. Instead, all of the required work and
items to be furnished should be specified in the
appropriate specification section.
· Make certain the drawings show items required
by the specifications. For example, if the speci-
fications state, "Construction limits for erection
equipment are shown on Drawing S-6," then the
construction limits must be shown on that draw-
ing.
· Include Charpy requirements for Groups 4 and 5
rolled shapes that require full penetration welds.
See "Heavy Structural Shapes in Tension Appli-
cations,'' in Steel TIPS. [27]
Specifications on Jobsite. Specification writers
and structural designers are sometimes disturbed
to discover the steel erector is not using the
specifications or structural drawings to erect the
steel. The specification writer and structural de-
signer should realize the shop drawings, erection
drawings, bolt lists, welding procedures, and some-
times erection equipment used by the steel erector
are all developed from, are based on, and are
extensions of the specifications and drawings.
The steel erector's field crews will use these
documents to erect the steel, and not the specifi-
cations and drawings prepared by the structural
designer.
37
 Reference List
1. Code of Standard Practice for Steel Buildings
and Bridges, AISC, Chicago, June 10, 1992.
. Commentary on the Code of Standard Practice
for Steel Buildings and Bridges, AISC, Chicago,
June 10, 1992.
3. Detailing for Steel Construction, AISC, Chicago,
1983.
. David T. Ricker, "Steel Interchange," Modern
Steel Construction, AISC, Chicago, January
p. 9.
. David T. Ricker, "Some Practical Aspects of
Column Base Selection," Steel Design Guide
Series 1: Column Base Plates, AISC, Chicago,
1990, 43-51.
6. Manual of Steel Construction: Allowable Stress
Design, 9th ed., AISC, Chicago, 1989.
7. Quality Criteria and Inspection Standards, 3d
ed., AISC, Chicago, 1988.
. Vijay P. Khasat, "Steel Interchange," Modern
Steel Construction, AISC, Chicago, May 1993,
p. 10.
. David T. Ricker, "Steel Interchange," Modern
Steel Construction, AISC, Chicago, July 1993,
p. 9.
10. Thomas C. Powell, "Steel Interchange," Modern
Steel Construction, AISC, Chicago, December
1992, p. 12.
11. Manual of Steel Construction, Vol. II,
Connections, AISC, Chicago, 1992.
12. "What Design Engineers Can Do to Reduce
Fabrication Costs," Steel TIPS, Structural Steel
Educational Council, Moraga, California, June
1992 (Printed from Modern Steel Construction,
February 1992).
and
"What Design Engineers Can Do to Reduce
Fabrication Costs," Modern Steel Construction,
AISC, Chicago, February 1992, 28-33.
38
13. Article 29, "Erection and Construction," CALl
OSHA State of California Construction Safety
Orders, BNI Books, Los Angeles, June 1989, p.
244.
14. Lawrence A. Kloiber, "Designing Architecturally
Exposed Steel Tubes," Modern Steel
Construction, AISC, Chicago, March 1993, 30-
38.
15. Catalog of Standard Specifications Load Tables
and Weight Tables for Steel Joists and Joist
Girders, Steel Joist Institute, Myrtle Beach,
South Carolina, 1992.
16. Technical Digest, No. 9, Handling and Erection
of Steel Joists and Joist Girders, Steel Joist
Institute, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, 1992.
17. F. Robert Preece and Alvaro L. Collin,
"Structural Steel Construction in the '90s," Steel
TIPS, Structural Steel Education Council,
Walnut Creek, California, September, 1991.
1 8 . David T. Ricker, "Value Engineering and Steel
Economy," Steel TIPS, Structural Steel
Educational Council, Moraga, California, August
1992 (Printed from Modern Steel Construction,
February 1992).
and
David T. Ricker, "Value Engineering and Steel
Economy," Modern Steel Construction, AISC,
Chicago, February 1992, 22-26.
19. Steel Connections/Details and Relative Costs,
(Steel TIPS), The Steel Committee of California,
Walnut Creek, California, 1986.
20. W. A. Thornton, Ph.D., P.E., "Designing for Cost
Efficient Fabrication," Steel TIPS, Structural
Steel Educational Council, Moraga, California,
April 1992 (Printed from Modern Steel
Construction, February 1992).
and
W. A. Thornton, Ph.D., P.E., "Designing for Cost
Efficient Fabrication," Modern Steel
Construction, AISC, Chicago, February 1992,
12-20.
21. "Steel Interchange," Modern Steel Construction,
AISC, Chicago, March 1992, p. 10.
22. Structural Welding Code--Steel (D1.1), AWS,
Miami, 1992.
23. "Commentary on Highly Restrained Welded
Connections," AISC Engineering Journal,
Vol. 10, No. 3, 3d Quarter 1973, 61-73.
25. "Steel Deck Construction," Steel TIPS,
Structural Steel Educational Council, Moraga,
California, January 1992.
26. Manual of Practice, The Construction
Specifications Institute, Alexandria, Virginia.

24. "SDI Specifications and Commentary for
Composite Steel Floor Deck," Design Manual
for Composite Decks, Form Decks and Roof
Decks (Publication No.26), Steel Deck Institute,
Inc., Canton, Ohio, 1987, 14-21.
27. "Heavy Structural Shapes in Tension
Applications," Steel TIPS, Structural Steel
Educational Council, Moraga, California,
October 1993.

About the author

James J. Putkey is a consulting civil engineer in Orinda, California.

He received a BCE degree from the University of Santa Clara in
1954. After two years in the U.S. Army, 19 years with the Erection
Department of Bethlehem Steel Corporation--Pacific Coast Divi-
sion, and seven years with the University of California--Office of the
President, he started his own consulting business. He has provided
consulting services to owners, contractors, attorneys, and steel
erectors for the past 12 years.

39
 STRUCTURAL STEEL EDUCATIONAL COUNCIL
470 Fernwood Drive
Moraga, CA 94556
(510) 631-9570

SPONSORS

Adams & Smith Martin Iron Works, Inc.

Allied Steel Co., Inc. Mid West Steel Erection

Bannister Steel, Inc. Nelson Stud Welding Co.

Bethlehem Steel Corporation Oregon Steel Mills

C.A. Buchen Corporation PDM Strocal, Inc.

Butler Manufacturing Co. Reno Iron Works

G.M. Iron Works Co. H.H. Robertson Co.

The Herrick Corporation Southland Iron Works

Hoertig Iron Works Stockton Steel

Hogan Mfg., Inc. U.S. Steel Corporation

Junior Steel Co. Verco Manufacturing, Inc.

Lee & Daniel Vulcraft Sales Corp.

McLean Steel, Inc.

I
- The- local structural Steel industry (above sponsors) stands ready to assist You in - [
-. determining the most economical solution for your products. Our assistance can
· range from budget prices and estimated tonnage to cost comparisons, fabrication
details and delivery schedules.
I
Funding for this publication provided by the California Iron Workers Administrative Trust.